English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Prior to the 1990s, a tangible East Asian security architecture remained elusive. This was not for want of trying. Several ill-fated efforts were undertaken to establish regional groupings which, over time, provided the basis for a more substantial East Asian security architecture. These included the Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO)—an eight member grouping established in 1955 that began to lose members and was finally dissolved in 1977, and both Maphilindo and the Association of Southeast Asia (ASA).1 Likewise, in Northeast Asia, the Asian and Pacific Council (ASPAC)—a South Korean initiative established in 1966 and comprising nine member countries—struggled due to the diverging perceptions and interests of its membership, and finally collapsed in 1975.2 Flowing from this legacy was the more successful sub-regional Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), founded in 1967 and expanded via several avenues, including a major security component, the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). But even ASEAN’s initial collaborative functions were essentially economic, political and cultural.

Developing East Asia’s Security Architecture: An Australian perspective on ASEAN processes